Navigate:

Senate wages flights fight

US Airways stands to convert the most regional routes to more profitable long-distance flights. |
AP Photo
Close

That hasn’t stopped opponents from trying to tag the deal as an Arizona earmark.

Kyl spokesman Ryan Patmintra called the earmark charge “ridiculous,” particularly because the deal would benefit the entire West. For instance, Los Angeles, which currently has only one direct flight back and forth to National, would quite likely get more flights.

Text Size

-

+

reset

“I don’t think anybody in Arizona benefits any more than anybody in the Washington, D.C., metro area. We’re simply trying to give consumers and passengers more options when it comes to direct flights from our nation’s capital out West,” he said.

US Airways chief lobbyist Tom Chapman acknowledged that the airline stands to gain the most under the proposal. Depending on how many more total flights Congress authorizes, the airline most likely would fly at least one more flight to Phoenix. California, he said, would get the bulk of the new flights.

Other critics of the deal fault Rockefeller for wheeling and dealing with Kyl and other Republicans before locking down his Democrats.

“He didn’t line up his Democrats first, which is Committee 101,” said a Senate Democratic aide. “He just went and made a deal with Kyl.”

And they question whether Rockefeller even has assurances from Republicans that they’ll vote for the bill if they get more flights out West. Some GOP senators are concerned about a proposed increase in the passenger facility charge, which some call a tax increase.

Some insiders say Republicans will go along with the fee increase if they get more flight slots out of National.

“They want to be treated fairly on slots, and they’re willing to go along with a PFC increase if they get slots,” said a senior Democratic aide.

But Patmintra said he doesn’t know if his boss would agree to support an increase in the passenger fees.

“I don’t know the terms of the negotiation,” he said. “We’re not actively involved in these negotiations by any means.”

Republicans aren’t Rockefeller’s only problem. In July, 10 Democratic senators and Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski signed a letter opposing adding more than five new flights, the number included in the House-passed version of the bill.

“Some suggested proposals, which have not come up for a vote in either chamber, will not only benefit a limited and identifiable set of airlines, they will also have unintended consequences on airline competition nationally due to it being a networked industry,” they wrote to Rockefeller, Hutchison and others.

Indeed, opponents of the proposal worry that airlines will eliminate service to smaller cities to serve bigger, more profitable hubs. Supporters dismiss that argument, saying that the proposal requires airlines to swap large cities if they trade a regional route for a long-distance one. But critics say there’s a back door around the requirement.

For instance, say an airline wants to fly to L.A. Airline officials might say they are replacing their New York route to fly West. But, critics argue, there’s nothing to stop the airline from later reinstituting its New York flight by canceling a route to a smaller city. Such a sleight of hand could hurt already underserved markets, they say.

Readers' Comments (9)

And all this time I thought that airlines were setting up flight schedules to maximize profit and maximize service to the public. Silly me.

Things are so screwed up in the airline industry right now I should have known that the incompetent policitians must have had their hands in it somewhere. Just one more reason why we need to fight for smaller government.

Is there anyone out there anywhere who can point out for me the specific provision in the constitution that allows the government this level of control over our lives?

DCA is a slotted airport (and slotted to capacity) which means any long distance flight added requires a shorter flight be cut and moved to another airport (Dulles or Baltimore) inconveniencing the travelling public. To add seven day a week service to Phoenix so a senator can fly out on Thursday night is idiotic.

This is exactly the type of petty corruption that makes us all crazy. I don't care who you are or what your political beliefs are, you must be disgusted with Senators spending their extremely valuable time and energy shilling for their financial sponsors, public interest be damned.

I don't care who you are or what your political beliefs are, you must be disgusted with Senators spending their extremely valuable time and energy shilling for their financial sponsors, public interest be damned.

You mean like when Harry Reid tries to get online gambling re-legalized, but only for the casinos who coughed up the money and even bussed their employees to the polls to vote for him . . ?

Obviously, the whole ridiculous arrangments is a poster-child for Congressional micro-managing and political power and influence.

That's why U.S. Senators are getting involved in such a detailed fashion over what should be a simple solution: drop the whole non-stop limit insanity, and allow airlines with slots at National to fly whereever they want to that makes the most commercial sense to them. As the airport is slot-limited, any overflow will go to Dulles or up the parkway to BWI.

And you wonder why Congress is such an easy target to riducule..........